Add Argentina To The List Of Countries Looking To Censor The Internet (For The Children, Of Course)

from the growing-list dept

We've noted that both Russia and China recently pushed for even more internet censorship, and both did so while claiming that it was really to "protect the children." Of course, lots of other countries are following suit. For example, Argentina is now considering a bill that appears to created a blacklist of websites that ISPs must block. Once again, this is done "for the children," as the list is supposed to include sites dealing with child porn. The problem, of course, is that such lists rarely seem to stick to just child porn -- and with little oversight, the over-blocking and over-filtering of legitimate content becomes way too easy. In the meantime, we're still at a loss as to how censorship is a better solution than actually going after those responsible if they're posting illegal content.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:14pm

    Cue ACs not understanding that Techdirt is not saying "do nothing about child porn", this is about not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Pixelation, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:14pm

    "we're still at a loss as to how censorship is a better solution than actually going after those responsible if they're posting illegal content."

    Pay attention to what they say, not what they do. Politics has little to do with reality.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:51pm

    Re:

    We understand. We also understand that nobody has come up with a better solution yet.

    Propose a better solution. The world is all ears (or eyes in this case).

    I doubt I will get much back.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    BreadGod (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 8:57pm

    "In the meantime, we're still at a loss as to how censorship is a better solution than actually going after those responsible if they're posting illegal content."

    Because actually going after those who post illegal content takes effort, and effort is anathema to the government.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 9:01pm

    Re: Re:

    There is not a known good solution other than taking out the pornographers at the source.

    And really, if you're blocking the sites but not stopping it from being filmed you haven't stopped shit. They'll just keep abusing children and routing around the blocks on the internet and all we'll end up with is a worse internet.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Alana (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 9:47pm

    Re: Re:

    It's called investigating everything you block before blocking it.

    Boom.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 9:48pm

    Blocking websites that have child porn on them and not going after the sickos that do it is equivalent to looking the other way and pretending it doesn't happen.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Atkray (profile), Jul 30th, 2012 @ 10:04pm

    Re:

    ^THIS^

    This needs to become the standard response when someone wants to censor.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 10:11pm

    The Internet is to the World-Wide-Web (the thing that Tim Berners-Lee is credited for, and of which web-sites are a part) as Human Language is to English.

    Please do not confuse the issue further by calling the World-Wide-Web the Internet. They are most certainly NOT one and the same.

    As to the subject at hand, exactly what do you suggest as a solution?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 10:21pm

    In the meantime, we're still at a loss as to how censorship is a better solution than actually going after those responsible if they're posting illegal content.

    Easy, it pays better. You can make a tidy sum from them by sweeping them under the rug instead of stamping them out.
    ...Oh, did you mean a better solution for the abused children? Sorry, not going to happen. Kids don't have enough bribe money to be worth protecting.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 10:32pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    It gets back to the same issue each time: Blocking won't stop the hardened criminals, that is a different game. Blocks are intended to kepe the merely curious or the potential convert away from the content.

    The other choice is to let it all out there, give them all a free pass, and make sure that Google indexes it for good measure. After all, if you support free speech, you would be very against Google not indexing child porn, right?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 30th, 2012 @ 11:33pm

    none of the countries that are going down this road are doing so for any reasons other than to invade privacy and take away freedoms. they are in the main more like dictatorships than anything but supposed democratic countries like the USA and UK are jumping on the band wagon, whilst condemning those other countries of course. the way things are going, the internet as we know it is going to stop completely, then, as far as ordinary people are concerned, we will only be able to access emails which will be checked first for 'illicit' content and sites that the individual governments allow, the rest of the internet being blocked completely. think back to what started all this censorship and put the blame squarely where it belongs, at the door of the entertainment industries.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Jul 31st, 2012 @ 12:03am

    Re: Re:

    "We also understand that nobody has come up with a better solution yet."

    Then you didn't bother reading the article, let alone listen to the actual arguments being raised. How typical.

    The answer is to go after those responsible for producing the content. Sweeping it under a virtual rug not only does nothing to stop it, but it also create other problems - ranging from those people becoming more adept at using methods of distributing their content that are more difficult to police to perfectly legitimate speech being blocked. The unintended consequences can be as dangerous as the content being attacked in the first place.

    Is it really that difficult to grasp?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Jul 31st, 2012 @ 12:23am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "Blocks are intended to kepe the merely curious or the potential convert away from the content."

    That's always an excuse, though. It doesn't work, and I don't know about you but I've never "stumbled" across porn, let alone child porn.

    It's just yet another route to introduce widespread censorship. Oh, "it's for the children" now, but do you honestly think these systems won't be abused for unrelated censorship in the near future? You're pretty naive if so.

    "The other choice is to let it all out there, give them all a free pass, and make sure that Google indexes it for good measure."

    That literally makes no sense. Give who a free pass? Are you saying that there's no way to stop it except for blocking Google?

    "After all, if you support free speech, you would be very against Google not indexing child porn, right?"

    Of course you would, not least because Google shouldn't be making the call as to what is and isn't OK to index. Go ahead, index it and track those who search for it, then let the police use the same tools to track and arrest those responsible for producing it. Trying to hide it and pretend it doesn't exist doesn't stop it, so stop bullshitting.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 12:37am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "That's always an excuse, though. It doesn't work, and I don't know about you but I've never "stumbled" across porn, let alone child porn."

    Paul, clearly you don't get out much. It's incredibly easy to stumble across porn, and not really THAT hard to find child porn, sadly enough. If you have IRC, you have all you need to get child porn.

    "It's just yet another route to introduce widespread censorship."

    Prove it. It's never been shown. Mike may spew on about it, but can you show me anywhere that such a specific law has lead to more widespread censorship of ideas and protected speech?

    "That literally makes no sense. Give who a free pass? Are you saying that there's no way to stop it except for blocking Google?"

    No idiot, what I am saying is that if you are unwilling to do anything about it in general, why should Google? Shouldn't Google have a nice section of links for child porn that point to the real thing? After all, if Google can "censor" their SERPs to avoid putting child porn up there, don't you think it's worth doing on a more official level?

    Google already makes the calls, it already avoids indexing child porn. Are you saying they are censoring your right to child porn now?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Jul 31st, 2012 @ 12:56am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "Paul, clearly you don't get out much. It's incredibly easy to stumble across porn, and not really THAT hard to find child porn, sadly enough."

    That's a load of crap. I can honestly say I've NEVER seen child porn online, and with safesearch and other filters it's harder than ever before to simply stumble across ordinary porn. If you find it regularly, I have to wonder what the search terms you're using are.

    "If you have IRC, you have all you need to get child porn."

    I thought we were talking about web filtering. Are you moving goalposts, or are you just inadvertently admitting that stumbling across child porn while browsing just isn't going to happen?

    "Prove it. It's never been shown."

    Yes, we should wait until the worst case scenario actually happens before complaining. Russia and China - yeah *those* countries will never use web censorship for political and other legitimate speech, right?

    "No idiot, what I am saying is that if you are unwilling to do anything about it in general, why should Google?"

    When did I say I was unwilling to do anything about it? I said that a government-enforced web filter wasn't the way forward, but don't try and pretend I said to ignore it. Stop lying about my positions to my face, you'll have an easier conversation.

    "After all, if Google can "censor" their SERPs to avoid putting child porn up there, don't you think it's worth doing on a more official level?"

    Absolutely not. Google is optional, and can work with authorities to catch those responsible. I do not support ANY form of government-mandated filter forced upon a nation, for ANY reason.

    "Google already makes the calls, it already avoids indexing child porn. Are you saying they are censoring your right to child porn now?"

    Again, lying about me and putting words into my mouth won't work. Google can do what they want - they're a private entity that nobody is forced to use. Are you really too stupid to understand the difference between that and a government enforced filter?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 1:06am

    Censorship... Yeah that will work for sure. "100% full proof"
    Just like shutting Megaupload down stopped piracy.

    Really if they want to censor WHY NOT MAKE A BILL THAT ONLY APPLIES TO CHILD PORN.

    They get greedy and try to make their bills possible to censor anything they want when they want..

    The only thing their idea of censorship would do is hurt legitimate websites. Their ideas of censorship are meant to PROTECT THE MONOPOLIES not the children.

    There is only one way to stop child porn.. Arrest the people responsible for taking the pictures.
    Oh wait if it was that easy there would probably be no such thing as serial killers as well.

    The truth in this case fucking sucks :( as there are many serial killers still on the run with little luck in catching them.
    Even worse there are probably more that's not even known as serial killers as the cases have not been connected yet and might never be.

    What can we do to stop these acts? Well awareness is a start that's for damn sure. If I ever did have a kid they would learn to stay away from strangers as well as taking more public paths home straying away from the shady areas.

    Internet access for my kid would be very limited till they were old enough to understand all the dangers.
    No going out after dark.
    No phone calls to numbers I could not verify.

    No desert till they eat their goddamn broccoli alright probably not that harsh lol. I'm knocking on 30 and I still think broccoli is nasty.

    Some of the rules I would have might make my kid get pissed at me but in the long run they'll thank me.

    Lucky for me I would never bring another person into this fucked up world. Even with good awareness crime will still happen :(

    What do we do? We teach we guide and then hope for the best. It's all we really can do.

    If censorship was really for the kids they would leave the power for companies to abuse it out.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    Zilberfrid (profile), Jul 31st, 2012 @ 1:25am

    Argentina still has to face its past

    Argentina had a very bad stain in history for which no full account has been taken, them censoring information on the internet might not be just what you need.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_War

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 2:01am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You have clearly been searching and viewing child porn. You basically just admitted to it.

    No sane, normal person just 'happens' to find child porn, especially not on IRC.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 2:48am

    I had checked this law some days ago, and I can tell you it won't pass just out of technicalities (article 9 makes the wrong references rendering it useless, a lot of cases aren't taken into account leading to huge loopholes, the effort needed to monitor all of internet may make it unfeasible from an economical viewpoint, etc.)

    In case somebody wonders (this article doesn't seem to explain much), what this law would do if applied is force ISPs to install filtering software on all users (and yes, if your system doesn't support it that means you can't use internet - will do wonders for the smartphone market!). Cybercafes will be required to impose the filters on all users too.

    The list of material that would be blocked by this law is (transliteration from article 2): swearing; exhibition of discrimination by race, ethnic, gender, sexual orientation, ideology, socioeconomical status or nationality; unjustified verbal or physical violence; representations of explicit sexual acts for non-educational purposes and "other contents that affect [children's] integrity"

    And yes, this is just a senator not knowing anything at all about how internet works. She thinks it works the same way TV and radio does.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    DaF, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 3:02am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "You are with us or against us" must be ACs fav line. Along with the greasy "Got sumfing to hide?"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 3:55am

    "Dont cry for me Argentina, the truth is i never cared for you, all through the darkest times of internet freedom, you kept your promiss, now keep your distance" biatches

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 4:31am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "Blocks are intended to kepe the merely curious or the potential convert away from the content."

    Yeah, that worked so well under the prohibition.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 5:16am

    You know, in Children of Men, they never discussed the upsides.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    Cory of PC (profile), Jul 31st, 2012 @ 5:34am

    Re: Re:

    You mean:

    Blocking websites that have (insert content here) on them and not going after the (insert criminal type here) that do it is equivalent to looking the other way and pretending it didn't happen.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 7:43am

    Fix the link, the pirate's site is down.
    Here is the original source from Vía Libre Foundation (Argentina's EFF):
    http://www.vialibre.org.ar/2012/07/21/en-el-nombre-del-nino/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 8:05am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Not against google not indexing it, but just sayong it hasn't worked out for the anti-piracy folks so why would it work for child porn?

    Of course it's easier to tell child porn than it is to tell if something's infringement so there's that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 8:06am

    Re:

    one vote for "article too long didn't read"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 9:00am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I assume he searches nude 12 year old or some shit.

    I've never ever seen even one instance of child porn on the internet. EVER

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 12:56pm

    Using blocks instead of going to the source is like trying to hold a blanket up in front of a naked man running around in public.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 31st, 2012 @ 5:19pm

    Re: Re:

    Propose a better solution to stopping car crashes from killing and maiming children, than banning motor vehicles or never use a vehicle again.

    Don't you care about all the children being maimed and killed? Don't agree this must be stopped at all and any cost?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This